|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On January 11 2017 06:44 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 06:38 LegalLord wrote:On January 11 2017 06:37 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 11 2017 06:33 LegalLord wrote:
Israel is different in that no one could say that Israel isn't doing its own fair share in protecting itself. Meanwhile you could definitely make the case for, say, Japan being reliant on American military support while slacking on its own defense costs. In fairness, Japan was kind of promised US protection so long as they don't build up their military--ever. I'm not exactly endorsing his policy - just explaining the rationale that would be behind it. I actually agree 100% with your rational. Its just that one weird corner case with post-world war Japan. Not sure if its still "enforced" or not, but I'm assuming that after 10-15 years of being told America will protect them, they kind of just said "fuck it."
The Japanese understand that America's resources are limited, and that Japan must start contributing more significantly to its own defense in light of growing Chinese aggression.
|
On January 11 2017 06:54 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 06:44 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 11 2017 06:38 LegalLord wrote:On January 11 2017 06:37 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 11 2017 06:33 LegalLord wrote:
Israel is different in that no one could say that Israel isn't doing its own fair share in protecting itself. Meanwhile you could definitely make the case for, say, Japan being reliant on American military support while slacking on its own defense costs. In fairness, Japan was kind of promised US protection so long as they don't build up their military--ever. I'm not exactly endorsing his policy - just explaining the rationale that would be behind it. I actually agree 100% with your rational. Its just that one weird corner case with post-world war Japan. Not sure if its still "enforced" or not, but I'm assuming that after 10-15 years of being told America will protect them, they kind of just said "fuck it." The Japanese understand that America's resources are limited, and that Japan must start contributing more significantly to its own defense in light of growing Chinese aggression.
That will also come with a reconsideration of alliance structures given that Japan has two powerful military neighbors who are less than pleased about its closeness to the US.
|
|
|
Happy birthday, Doodsmack!
|
Classified documents presented last week to President Obama and President-elect Trump included allegations that Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump, multiple US officials with direct knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.
The allegations were presented in a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. The allegations came, in part, from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative, whose past work US intelligence officials consider credible. The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Mr. Trump.
The classified briefings last week were presented by four of the senior-most US intelligence chiefs -- Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, and NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers.
One reason the nation's intelligence chiefs took the extraordinary step of including the synopsis in the briefing documents was to make the President-elect aware that such allegations involving him are circulating among intelligence agencies, senior members of Congress and other government officials in Washington, multiple sources tell CNN.
CNN
This is the type of thing where Trump's moral depravity could become relevant. If someone tried to blackmail him, would he put the country's interests above his own?
|
On January 11 2017 07:46 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +Classified documents presented last week to President Obama and President-elect Trump included allegations that Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump, multiple US officials with direct knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.
The allegations were presented in a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. The allegations came, in part, from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative, whose past work US intelligence officials consider credible. The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Mr. Trump.
The classified briefings last week were presented by four of the senior-most US intelligence chiefs -- Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, and NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers.
One reason the nation's intelligence chiefs took the extraordinary step of including the synopsis in the briefing documents was to make the President-elect aware that such allegations involving him are circulating among intelligence agencies, senior members of Congress and other government officials in Washington, multiple sources tell CNN. CNNThis is the type of thing where Trump's moral depravity could become relevant. If someone tried to blackmail him, would he put the country's interests above his own?
The more interesting question to me is, with everything we now know about Donald Trump, what could Russia possibly have on him? He doesn't seem to give a fuck about sexual harassment, conflicts of interest, him being an actual moron, or being closely associated with the human dregs of society. What could Russia possibly have in the chamber that could actually sway his policy decisions?
|
Don't want to go off the deep end of conspiracy, but there have been allegations recently that Trump has a history with the Russian mafia, having to do with his casinos in Atlantic City.
Independent presidential candidate and a former CIA operations officer Evan McMullin on Friday said Republican Donald Trump may be lavishing praise on Russia and its leader because he’s being blackmailed.
"You know I hear from my old intelligence friends that Donald Trump has been engaged in some activities in Russia that Vladimir Putin may be using to blackmail Trump," McMullin said in an interview with CNN.
Presenting this only as "hey look at this conspiracy theory".
Follow the rabbit hole below...
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Get ready cat 5 storm of deflection from Conway if true.
|
This is about as compelling as #pizzagate. I find it damned near impossible to believe that anyone (other than the Russians) would have sat on anything during the campaign. These people need to put up or shut up.
|
I would easily believe the Russian government has financial info on him that would bruise his ego enough to use it as leverage-just look at his reaction to Clinton's needling on the subject, alongside not releasing his tax returns, and you know it's a delicate thing for him.
I would not be unduly surprised if there were some cocaine-fueled billionaire party photos and videos that would reawaken the harassment stuff with potentially under-legal-age-in-US girls, which would also really wound his ego-he did not like that phase of the campaign one bit and it got under his skin pretty bad (good thing Conway took his twitter away after the piggy stuff).
I doubt anyone non-government could grab either of those things at this point though, so I doubt anything will come of it.
LMAO video evidence of Trump hiring prostitutes to piss on the bed Obama stayed in in Russia? Gonna call BS here, though of course if it was real we'd never know. Also funny if they really didn't need the leverage because he and his team were so darn cooperative already.
|
|
|
On January 11 2017 08:06 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 07:46 Doodsmack wrote:Classified documents presented last week to President Obama and President-elect Trump included allegations that Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump, multiple US officials with direct knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.
The allegations were presented in a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. The allegations came, in part, from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative, whose past work US intelligence officials consider credible. The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Mr. Trump.
The classified briefings last week were presented by four of the senior-most US intelligence chiefs -- Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, and NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers.
One reason the nation's intelligence chiefs took the extraordinary step of including the synopsis in the briefing documents was to make the President-elect aware that such allegations involving him are circulating among intelligence agencies, senior members of Congress and other government officials in Washington, multiple sources tell CNN. CNNThis is the type of thing where Trump's moral depravity could become relevant. If someone tried to blackmail him, would he put the country's interests above his own? The more interesting question to me is, with everything we now know about Donald Trump, what could Russia possibly have on him? He doesn't seem to give a fuck about sexual harassment, conflicts of interest, him being an actual moron, or being closely associated with the human dregs of society. What could Russia possibly have in the chamber that could actually sway his policy decisions?
The one thing Trump loves more than anything; friendship.
|
I seem to remember a headline to the effect of "FBI see's no clear link to Russia"?
Also lol@ David Brock, at least he's doing what I said Democrats should be.
Dear Senator Sanders: I’m with You in the Fight Ahead
From the snow-filled days of door-knocking in New Hampshire, to November’s devastating result, the 2016 presidential election was hard-fought and heartbreaking. On the Democratic side, we had two leading candidates who each articulated a vision of an inclusive, prosperous, vibrant American democracy. On the other side, we had Donald Trump, the most corrupt and least qualified man ever to seek the presidency.
It’s no secret who I supported. I was one of the most visible and vocal advocates of Secretary Hillary Clinton. Many others backed you, Senator Sanders, with contagious zeal. At times during the Democratic primary, I was criticized for being too aggressive in my support for Secretary Clinton — and rightly so. Looking back, I recognize that there were a few moments when my drive to put Hillary in the White House led me to take too stiff a jab. I own up to that, I regret it, and I apologize to you and your supporters for it.
With Trump’s inauguration looming just days away, now is the time for us to unite as a party and a progressive movement, and put the resentments of the past behind us. Trump’s rise to power, fueled by hatred and portending crisis, threatens to eviscerate our constitutional system of government. Our nation marches closer to Trumpism each day, a path paved with reckless Tweets and the normalization of the ugly and the absurd.
We who reject Trump’s bankrupt leadership must heal old wounds, reorient ourselves, and embrace common goals. And if there is one thing on which we can all agree, it’s this: we cannot concede any ground. Not to the alt-right, not to the Kochs, not to the Paul Ryan establishment, and not, most of all, to Donald Trump, our incoming kleptocrat-in-chief. We must unify in resistance.
With the stakes so high, I pledge to help harness the passion that you and your supporters unleashed to empower progressives — Democrats up and down ballot — and to hold Donald Trump accountable.
I plan to fight like hell the next four years for our shared values and ideas. And I know that you will, too
Senator Sanders: your candidacy electrified millions. From students to working class families, you inspired Americans to be more engaged in the political process.
Throughout your life of advocacy and career in public service, you have been a leader on some of the same issues to which I’ve devoted my professional life. You were one of the first to identify and call for media reform. That leadership has included calling out the corporate media for refusing to cover climate change, something my organization Media Matters has extensively exposed.
We need you to continue to be the voice of reason in a world that has been spun out of control.
Source
|
I highly doubt that, if Russia intended to plant a mole in the US government, that they would use the most disliked candidate in history in pursuit of that goal. I'm quite sure they just worked with what they got and the anti-Clinton sentiment just happened to be substantial enough to make it work out.
|
On January 11 2017 08:45 LegalLord wrote:
I highly doubt that, if Russia intended to plant a mole in the US government, that they would use the most disliked candidate in history in pursuit of that goal. I'm quite sure they just worked with what they got and the anti-Clinton sentiment just happened to be substantial enough to make it work out.
Not even talking KGB spyworks bullshit. Its most likely that he's just had good relations with them and then all of a sudden they're like "wait, you're running for what?"
|
On January 11 2017 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:I seem to remember a headline to the effect of "FBI see's no clear link to Russia"? Also lol@ David Brock, at least he's doing what I said Democrats should be. Show nested quote +Dear Senator Sanders: I’m with You in the Fight Ahead
From the snow-filled days of door-knocking in New Hampshire, to November’s devastating result, the 2016 presidential election was hard-fought and heartbreaking. On the Democratic side, we had two leading candidates who each articulated a vision of an inclusive, prosperous, vibrant American democracy. On the other side, we had Donald Trump, the most corrupt and least qualified man ever to seek the presidency.
It’s no secret who I supported. I was one of the most visible and vocal advocates of Secretary Hillary Clinton. Many others backed you, Senator Sanders, with contagious zeal. At times during the Democratic primary, I was criticized for being too aggressive in my support for Secretary Clinton — and rightly so. Looking back, I recognize that there were a few moments when my drive to put Hillary in the White House led me to take too stiff a jab. I own up to that, I regret it, and I apologize to you and your supporters for it.
With Trump’s inauguration looming just days away, now is the time for us to unite as a party and a progressive movement, and put the resentments of the past behind us. Trump’s rise to power, fueled by hatred and portending crisis, threatens to eviscerate our constitutional system of government. Our nation marches closer to Trumpism each day, a path paved with reckless Tweets and the normalization of the ugly and the absurd.
We who reject Trump’s bankrupt leadership must heal old wounds, reorient ourselves, and embrace common goals. And if there is one thing on which we can all agree, it’s this: we cannot concede any ground. Not to the alt-right, not to the Kochs, not to the Paul Ryan establishment, and not, most of all, to Donald Trump, our incoming kleptocrat-in-chief. We must unify in resistance.
With the stakes so high, I pledge to help harness the passion that you and your supporters unleashed to empower progressives — Democrats up and down ballot — and to hold Donald Trump accountable.
I plan to fight like hell the next four years for our shared values and ideas. And I know that you will, too
Senator Sanders: your candidacy electrified millions. From students to working class families, you inspired Americans to be more engaged in the political process.
Throughout your life of advocacy and career in public service, you have been a leader on some of the same issues to which I’ve devoted my professional life. You were one of the first to identify and call for media reform. That leadership has included calling out the corporate media for refusing to cover climate change, something my organization Media Matters has extensively exposed.
We need you to continue to be the voice of reason in a world that has been spun out of control. Source
That headline was specifically discussing whether Russia had had a part in directly probing voting machines if I recall correctly. It was widely interpreted otherwise however; it was also coming out during the weird "there's a server that seems to be acting as a hotline to Russia" stuff and basically shared an identical conclusion to other sources but phrased conclusions differently (everyone said there was no way to definitively show a link as there were a couple alternative undisprovable explanations).
That said that Buzzfeed dump doesn't seem too legit or crazy unless I'm missing something.
|
I'm cruising through the memos. These were all created during the campaign (mostly during the summer). Here's the gist of it:
1) Trump likes whores and golden showers, and the Russians videotaped some of his exploits.
2) Given their mutual interest on the matter, Trump's campaign worked with Moscow to torpedo Hillary.
3) Russia had some buyer's remorse for shitting on Hillary given the political firestorm that followed.
|
On January 11 2017 08:58 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:I seem to remember a headline to the effect of "FBI see's no clear link to Russia"? Also lol@ David Brock, at least he's doing what I said Democrats should be. Dear Senator Sanders: I’m with You in the Fight Ahead
From the snow-filled days of door-knocking in New Hampshire, to November’s devastating result, the 2016 presidential election was hard-fought and heartbreaking. On the Democratic side, we had two leading candidates who each articulated a vision of an inclusive, prosperous, vibrant American democracy. On the other side, we had Donald Trump, the most corrupt and least qualified man ever to seek the presidency.
It’s no secret who I supported. I was one of the most visible and vocal advocates of Secretary Hillary Clinton. Many others backed you, Senator Sanders, with contagious zeal. At times during the Democratic primary, I was criticized for being too aggressive in my support for Secretary Clinton — and rightly so. Looking back, I recognize that there were a few moments when my drive to put Hillary in the White House led me to take too stiff a jab. I own up to that, I regret it, and I apologize to you and your supporters for it.
With Trump’s inauguration looming just days away, now is the time for us to unite as a party and a progressive movement, and put the resentments of the past behind us. Trump’s rise to power, fueled by hatred and portending crisis, threatens to eviscerate our constitutional system of government. Our nation marches closer to Trumpism each day, a path paved with reckless Tweets and the normalization of the ugly and the absurd.
We who reject Trump’s bankrupt leadership must heal old wounds, reorient ourselves, and embrace common goals. And if there is one thing on which we can all agree, it’s this: we cannot concede any ground. Not to the alt-right, not to the Kochs, not to the Paul Ryan establishment, and not, most of all, to Donald Trump, our incoming kleptocrat-in-chief. We must unify in resistance.
With the stakes so high, I pledge to help harness the passion that you and your supporters unleashed to empower progressives — Democrats up and down ballot — and to hold Donald Trump accountable.
I plan to fight like hell the next four years for our shared values and ideas. And I know that you will, too
Senator Sanders: your candidacy electrified millions. From students to working class families, you inspired Americans to be more engaged in the political process.
Throughout your life of advocacy and career in public service, you have been a leader on some of the same issues to which I’ve devoted my professional life. You were one of the first to identify and call for media reform. That leadership has included calling out the corporate media for refusing to cover climate change, something my organization Media Matters has extensively exposed.
We need you to continue to be the voice of reason in a world that has been spun out of control. Source That headline was specifically discussing whether Russia had had a part in directly probing voting machines if I recall correctly. It was widely interpreted otherwise however; it was also coming out during the weird "there's a server that seems to be acting as a hotline to Russia" stuff and basically shared an identical conclusion to other sources but phrased conclusions differently (everyone said there was no way to definitively show a link as there were a couple alternative undisprovable explanations).
I don't think so.
WASHINGTON — For much of the summer, the F.B.I. pursued a widening investigation into a Russian role in the American presidential campaign. Agents scrutinized advisers close to Donald J. Trump, looked for financial connections with Russian financial figures, searched for those involved in hacking the computers of Democrats, and even chased a lead — which they ultimately came to doubt — about a possible secret channel of email communication from the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.
Law enforcement officials say that none of the investigations so far have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government. And even the hacking into Democratic emails, F.B.I. and intelligence officials now believe, was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump.
Source
Also anyone see Hillary's ghost cabinet, conflicts galore (though probably still not as flagrant as Trumps)?
|
On January 11 2017 09:02 xDaunt wrote:
I'm cruising through the memos. These were all created during the campaign (mostly during the summer). Here's the gist of it:
1) Trump likes whores and golden showers, and the Russians videotaped some of his exploits.
2) Given their mutual interest on the matter, Trump's campaign worked with Moscow to torpedo Hillary.
3) Russia had some buyer's remorse for shitting on Hillary given the political firestorm that followed.
There's also some stuff about using Trump's campaign and connections to scout info on Russian oligarchs/their families in the U.S.
Plus outlines that Trump advisers were having secret meetings with Russia authorities during the campaign. Which *could* constitute something like treason, depending on the content of the meetings.
|
On January 11 2017 09:03 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 08:58 TheTenthDoc wrote:On January 11 2017 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:I seem to remember a headline to the effect of "FBI see's no clear link to Russia"? Also lol@ David Brock, at least he's doing what I said Democrats should be. Dear Senator Sanders: I’m with You in the Fight Ahead
From the snow-filled days of door-knocking in New Hampshire, to November’s devastating result, the 2016 presidential election was hard-fought and heartbreaking. On the Democratic side, we had two leading candidates who each articulated a vision of an inclusive, prosperous, vibrant American democracy. On the other side, we had Donald Trump, the most corrupt and least qualified man ever to seek the presidency.
It’s no secret who I supported. I was one of the most visible and vocal advocates of Secretary Hillary Clinton. Many others backed you, Senator Sanders, with contagious zeal. At times during the Democratic primary, I was criticized for being too aggressive in my support for Secretary Clinton — and rightly so. Looking back, I recognize that there were a few moments when my drive to put Hillary in the White House led me to take too stiff a jab. I own up to that, I regret it, and I apologize to you and your supporters for it.
With Trump’s inauguration looming just days away, now is the time for us to unite as a party and a progressive movement, and put the resentments of the past behind us. Trump’s rise to power, fueled by hatred and portending crisis, threatens to eviscerate our constitutional system of government. Our nation marches closer to Trumpism each day, a path paved with reckless Tweets and the normalization of the ugly and the absurd.
We who reject Trump’s bankrupt leadership must heal old wounds, reorient ourselves, and embrace common goals. And if there is one thing on which we can all agree, it’s this: we cannot concede any ground. Not to the alt-right, not to the Kochs, not to the Paul Ryan establishment, and not, most of all, to Donald Trump, our incoming kleptocrat-in-chief. We must unify in resistance.
With the stakes so high, I pledge to help harness the passion that you and your supporters unleashed to empower progressives — Democrats up and down ballot — and to hold Donald Trump accountable.
I plan to fight like hell the next four years for our shared values and ideas. And I know that you will, too
Senator Sanders: your candidacy electrified millions. From students to working class families, you inspired Americans to be more engaged in the political process.
Throughout your life of advocacy and career in public service, you have been a leader on some of the same issues to which I’ve devoted my professional life. You were one of the first to identify and call for media reform. That leadership has included calling out the corporate media for refusing to cover climate change, something my organization Media Matters has extensively exposed.
We need you to continue to be the voice of reason in a world that has been spun out of control. Source That headline was specifically discussing whether Russia had had a part in directly probing voting machines if I recall correctly. It was widely interpreted otherwise however; it was also coming out during the weird "there's a server that seems to be acting as a hotline to Russia" stuff and basically shared an identical conclusion to other sources but phrased conclusions differently (everyone said there was no way to definitively show a link as there were a couple alternative undisprovable explanations). I don't think so. Show nested quote +WASHINGTON — For much of the summer, the F.B.I. pursued a widening investigation into a Russian role in the American presidential campaign. Agents scrutinized advisers close to Donald J. Trump, looked for financial connections with Russian financial figures, searched for those involved in hacking the computers of Democrats, and even chased a lead — which they ultimately came to doubt — about a possible secret channel of email communication from the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.
Law enforcement officials say that none of the investigations so far have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government. And even the hacking into Democratic emails, F.B.I. and intelligence officials now believe, was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump. SourceAlso anyone see Hillary's ghost cabinet, conflicts galore (though probably still not as flagrant as Trumps)?
Um. You're showing the article headline is deceptive. The "no clear link to Russia" doesn't refer to the DNC hacking, which they agree has a clear link to Russia just perhaps not at the behest of the Trump campaign.
Moreover, if you read the details about the Trump/Russia server link in the article, it says:
F.B.I. officials spent weeks examining computer data showing an odd stream of activity to a Trump Organization server and Alfa Bank. Computer logs obtained by The New York Times show that two servers at Alfa Bank sent more than 2,700 “look-up” messages — a first step for one system’s computers to talk to another — to a Trump-connected server beginning in the spring. But the F.B.I. ultimately concluded that there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts.
Which is precisely the conclusions of others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
